Come on, stupid... You can be an Apple customer (iOS, ITMS etc.) without owning a computer that runs macOS and Numbers ("its own spreadsheet program").
Well, if you are an Apple customer and don't have a Mac, you can still use Numbers on your iPhone, or at iCloud.com.
Can confirm. I called Apple years ago to get my account deleted. You couldn't do it online back then, don't know if you can now. Anyways, after 20.minutes of warnings and legal agreements and "are you sure?" they deleted it...
Except that they said I could never sign up with the same email address again, so clearly they didn't delete everything.
Errm, yeah, either they clearly didn't delete everything, or they try hard to avoid that anybody (including you) can just open an account under a name that already had been used i the past, and then receive messages send now intended for that old account.
The article claims iAd failed because of the "walled garden" - that not enough personal info got out to the advertisers. IOW exactly what I and all of Apple's "conspirators" (that would be everybody living in reality, unlike you) said.
The whole point of Google's ads is that advertisers can't gather information on you. That separation of the company holding the personal/demographic data and the advertiser is the whole point of their model.
Yeah, you just proved you are a gullible fool. See, Google doesn't have to sell me that info, your claims about Google prove that.
You know what's funny about that article? Apple came out and admitted they were intentionally slowing down the devices on updates, of course for "good" reasons, completely refuting the claim by the article that Apple was not doing that. Their benchmarks didn't catch it.
They don't need to sell all of it, they simply give out enough that their customers have enough to rob you blind (figuratively). Like IP addresses and Cookies, as well as the target information. Which the advertisers can cross-corellate with similar data from other ad-networks.
Why do searches for "iPhone slow" spike when new models are released?
Our benchmarking data shows that, rather than intentionally degrading the performance of older models, Apple actually does a good job of supporting its older devices with regular updates that maintain a consistent level of performance across iOS versions.
That said, there are some factors that might affect people's perception of performance after updating an older device with a newer version of iOS. An update might add new features that use more resources or require more processing power. New apps developed for the latest models might not run as smoothly on older devices. Conversely, apps designed for an earlier version of iOS might not take full advantage of optimizations in the latest version. And then there is always the psychological effect of knowing that there is a new and improved model available, which can make your own device seem outdated.
Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload.
That's what they claim. Odd, then, that they always timed these "fixes" for when a new version of the iPhone came out?
"The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for 'iPhone slow' and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch."
Teslae don't use LIDAR and therefore presumably don't know how far away objects are. I.e. Pike's Peak and a discarded fast food wrapper presumably can look much the same to your $80,000 electric car. When driving, you and I Identify the nature of an object and use that knowledge to estimate distance
Yeah - and we don't need a fucking LIDAR to do so.
[T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.
You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably (because Facebook and Google already locked-down the ad sector) or they'd have even more information on you, given the lock-in/walled-garden approach they have.
"Don't drive into stationary objects" - that's so basic, it isn't even covered in driving 101. Any driver who showed over and over he couldn't do that would have his license revoked. And if his excuse was that above 60 mph he was too busy with moving objects to do that, doubly so.
Well, part of the argument is that if you were selling your software via retail stores, they would often demand 50%.
Of course, here in the 21st Century, who buys software from retail stores?
Yeah, today people buy from Amazon. Who takes 30% for software on their Android store. Who also takes 30% from books on their Kindle Direct Publishing platform - unless they take more.
The "warm noise" of vinyl is bad enough, but the magnetic echos that not only follow but precede the sounds that create them on magnetic tape are nerve wrecking.
Now, heat? Never mentioned in this thread until now, but consider elephants, rhinos, and other large land mammals (giraffes, etc) who survive daily at 30+ deg C temperatures. Maybe they move their habitat a few hundred miles North or South, but exist - they definitely can.
It's not my fault that you hate science, and science hates you.
2,000-5,000 ppm Headaches, sleepiness and stagnant, stale, stuffy air. Poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate and slight nausea may also be present.
5,000 Workplace exposure limit (as 8-hour TWA) in most jurisdictions.
And last but most certainly not least: what makes you think I was talking about the CO2 level in the first place? The problem is the heat. Land mammals above a certain size can't exist at these temperatures.
Because the title is "Empirical evidence for stability of the 405-kiloyear Jupiter–Venus eccentricity cycle over hundreds of millions of years" as if we already know perfectly well about the cycle, and they just show that it's stable.
They only figuratively stacked the solar panels and spent fuel rods in a tower, and compared hight. They didn't compare toxicity, let alone radioactivity. That would be a bullshit report if they actually provided numbers instead of comparing the Tower of Pisa to the Mt. Everest.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, stupid... You can be an Apple customer (iOS, ITMS etc.) without owning a computer that runs macOS and Numbers ("its own spreadsheet program").
Well, if you are an Apple customer and don't have a Mac, you can still use Numbers on your iPhone, or at iCloud.com.
Can confirm. I called Apple years ago to get my account deleted. You couldn't do it online back then, don't know if you can now. Anyways, after 20.minutes of warnings and legal agreements and "are you sure?" they deleted it...
Except that they said I could never sign up with the same email address again, so clearly they didn't delete everything.
Errm, yeah, either they clearly didn't delete everything, or they try hard to avoid that anybody (including you) can just open an account under a name that already had been used i the past, and then receive messages send now intended for that old account.
The article claims iAd failed because of the "walled garden" - that not enough personal info got out to the advertisers. IOW exactly what I and all of Apple's "conspirators" (that would be everybody living in reality, unlike you) said.
The whole point of Google's ads is that advertisers can't gather information on you. That separation of the company holding the personal/demographic data and the advertiser is the whole point of their model.
Yeah, you just proved you are a gullible fool. See, Google doesn't have to sell me that info, your claims about Google prove that.
https://benchmarks.ul.com/news... [ul.com]
You know what's funny about that article? Apple came out and admitted they were intentionally slowing down the devices on updates, of course for "good" reasons, completely refuting the claim by the article that Apple was not doing that. Their benchmarks didn't catch it.
Step out of the reality distortion field.
Try to follow the thread. Then shut up.
Why would Google sell your data?
They don't need to sell all of it, they simply give out enough that their customers have enough to rob you blind (figuratively). Like IP addresses and Cookies, as well as the target information. Which the advertisers can cross-corellate with similar data from other ad-networks.
Are you ignoring that i os devices have only one ad provider? (themselves)
What a load of crap. Tell me you get paid to write this, and don't actually believe that.
You have no proof of that so its not actually a fact.
https://benchmarks.ul.com/news...
Why do searches for "iPhone slow" spike when new models are released?
Our benchmarking data shows that, rather than intentionally degrading the performance of older models, Apple actually does a good job of supporting its older devices with regular updates that maintain a consistent level of performance across iOS versions.
That said, there are some factors that might affect people's perception of performance after updating an older device with a newer version of iOS. An update might add new features that use more resources or require more processing power. New apps developed for the latest models might not run as smoothly on older devices. Conversely, apps designed for an earlier version of iOS might not take full advantage of optimizations in the latest version. And then there is always the psychological effect of knowing that there is a new and improved model available, which can make your own device seem outdated.
Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload.
That's what they claim. Odd, then, that they always timed these "fixes" for when a new version of the iPhone came out?
"The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for 'iPhone slow' and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...
Yes. And it did so years before any throttling actually took place.
Teslae don't use LIDAR and therefore presumably don't know how far away objects are. I.e. Pike's Peak and a discarded fast food wrapper presumably can look much the same to your $80,000 electric car. When driving, you and I Identify the nature of an object and use that knowledge to estimate distance
Yeah - and we don't need a fucking LIDAR to do so.
[T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.
You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably (because Facebook and Google already locked-down the ad sector) or they'd have even more information on you, given the lock-in/walled-garden approach they have.
iAd failed because Apple didn't give out "enough" personal information, you deceptive little shitheel. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475874/data-privacy/apple-values-your-privacy--ads-firms-complain.html
"Don't drive into stationary objects" - that's so basic, it isn't even covered in driving 101. Any driver who showed over and over he couldn't do that would have his license revoked. And if his excuse was that above 60 mph he was too busy with moving objects to do that, doubly so.
Well, part of the argument is that if you were selling your software via retail stores, they would often demand 50%.
Of course, here in the 21st Century, who buys software from retail stores?
Yeah, today people buy from Amazon. Who takes 30% for software on their Android store. Who also takes 30% from books on their Kindle Direct Publishing platform - unless they take more.
Well, then I guess it's a good thing there's Android, eh? Tell me about Apple's leverage, again?
Ahh, but they don't know how to write Malware.
I've said many times on Slashdot that my keyboard is shit.
Considering you don't buy Apple products: so?
A flying car, a personal jet-pack, and him having sex with Giselle Bündchen and Leonardo DiCaprio on Mars.
I wish the cave ceiling wasn't leaking....
The stala[gm|ct]ites are free interior decorations.
"The cyber" is a word again, tape decks are back... what's next, twiddler keyboards and phreaking?
Teletypes for text entry. IBM Modell M is for pussies.
The "warm noise" of vinyl is bad enough, but the magnetic echos that not only follow but precede the sounds that create them on magnetic tape are nerve wrecking.
>
Now, heat? Never mentioned in this thread until now, but consider elephants, rhinos, and other large land mammals (giraffes, etc) who survive daily at 30+ deg C temperatures. Maybe they move their habitat a few hundred miles North or South, but exist - they definitely can.
It's not my fault that you hate science, and science hates you.
Actually, assuming you're talking about 2000-4000 PPM like it was back in the age of dinosaurs, we could absolutely survive as there is a vast wealth of medical data about living in CO2 levels at 2500 to 11,000 PPM.
"Toxicity was evaluated in male and female rats" - IOW just as I said you need to be a rat to survive.
Meanwhile, back in the real world: https://www.kane.co.uk/knowled...
2,000-5,000 ppm Headaches, sleepiness and stagnant, stale, stuffy air. Poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate and slight nausea may also be present. 5,000 Workplace exposure limit (as 8-hour TWA) in most jurisdictions.
And last but most certainly not least: what makes you think I was talking about the CO2 level in the first place? The problem is the heat. Land mammals above a certain size can't exist at these temperatures.
But think of all the millions of jobs that Trump's coal industry will bring! *cough*
More than 1000 a year alone to replace miners who died from Black Lung.
Because the title is "Empirical evidence for stability of the 405-kiloyear Jupiter–Venus eccentricity cycle over hundreds of millions of years" as if we already know perfectly well about the cycle, and they just show that it's stable.
Whatever
https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/17/07/01/0442203/study-claims-discarded-solar-panels-create-more-toxic-waste-than-nuclear-plants
They only figuratively stacked the solar panels and spent fuel rods in a tower, and compared hight. They didn't compare toxicity, let alone radioactivity. That would be a bullshit report if they actually provided numbers instead of comparing the Tower of Pisa to the Mt. Everest.
"Source hates science, so I'm going to claim my site is the bestest in the world and everything's Tippy Toppy, instead of factually responding."
FTFY